Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Thu, 01 March 2018 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290D712EAAD for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:07:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=juniper.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vzTDNjdci4uX for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:07:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F18312EA93 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:07:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108161.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w21G04bK030879; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:06:41 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=OfF4pSUoNjbmoXdiE6GwKmYsP/LloF1aj4k2Y2TxHYM=; b=tdSExVWyXvTzD+YCDk2kkbNhNaS3QIlEeh6xd9a4+z3K2aDbrPlYJS6PZKot0L0m6qRJ iex5QI6RFIG+gLMtfnlRDw6fs7355CyPSf0SgIyItOM9BkToL8eHeHxhdRygB/8I4q7g baT9laWXsp56SGlDAeV20GkkbJEA1x3d7qN9FNd7tCJknr5G0d8xrvR5YzNM73g5TCwG 3mCx5/rCEMleH+ojVT58EgGHuE98DjSK4lTKivud2fc7eyep4qIVGz8QTctCSmtcbWu3 8lJwkD070qYt1hzvDhnbIbaoiscE9Pgu3dSCMMADNnG98XHEZE9IgX65JacOYOL2RLMa SQ==
Received: from nam03-dm3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3nam03lp0015.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.15]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2geme8r11f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:06:41 -0800
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.147) by DM5PR05MB3563.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.242.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.548.6; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:06:39 +0000
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::507:f464:b89a:c64b]) by DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::507:f464:b89a:c64b%3]) with mapi id 15.20.0548.014; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:06:38 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
CC: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
Thread-Index: AQHTpZZd5Geu+8X2WUq2NsIzPrmhNqOj3UoAgAmtrxX//7BHAIACLXCAgAJ3xQCAAHZAAIAHiWIAgAG5BoD//7ZzAA==
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:06:38 +0000
Message-ID: <053208F1-483B-474E-BA31-58AA56390805@juniper.net>
References: <d4a73a00-dce2-2f11-29d0-0eb34920fd3f@cisco.com> <922E608D-951A-459A-B515-B53834C805C1@juniper.net> <022001d3aa6a$c31895e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <A8296BCA-A33F-44EB-AB94-706A7D4B5BE7@juniper.net> <E859CBB0-CCA7-4E38-909C-9639E9BCB01B@cisco.com> <D6E3E5DA-85D3-429B-8DA4-ADC5BD0E0C38@juniper.net> <F5A84131-6D5E-40D6-B981-9DF4B6314A19@gmail.com> <C062DDC9-8968-4B24-8289-6B2625D3193C@juniper.net> <172E0EAF-7A1B-41AD-955A-C6137B774864@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <172E0EAF-7A1B-41AD-955A-C6137B774864@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR05MB3563; 7:C9ICeZuYZW/iwTKYZiAanjwhklMtC25Eu+wRmrAR6ktyIb6W8gFxTiczvzGgXP8uhaowxaMa285jyy/XcwDiSJFWyhLZ+7uUSZj37sw29D/E1W3i7np+cGlz17pZ+OO6jymvtBEHElK2hxR1ltBzQZmV5Dz/OxH3gYegvobvZDuQF7okxZ+uJ4g2LMOItHRyznYW9UMzsPt0iRUpNJI2zX0QKx0nLmx9ounWfzyY0GV48YL+EziolpVAZWugKp8g
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;SSOR;
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:SKI; SCL:-1; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(346002)(366004)(39860400002)(39380400002)(376002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(6486002)(53946003)(66066001)(6436002)(8936002)(478600001)(36756003)(6512007)(93886005)(81166006)(236005)(14454004)(25786009)(53936002)(186003)(102836004)(39060400002)(81156014)(54896002)(8676002)(53546011)(6506007)(97736004)(8666007)(76176011)(6306002)(106356001)(5250100002)(6246003)(82746002)(606006)(3660700001)(54906003)(316002)(99286004)(58126008)(2900100001)(229853002)(4326008)(33656002)(2950100002)(83716003)(3280700002)(3846002)(6116002)(7736002)(105586002)(5660300001)(966005)(26005)(68736007)(2906002)(575784001)(86362001)(110136005)(120695007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3563; H:DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: fefe1bbf-f5eb-4500-45b4-08d57f8e6a26
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:(178726229863574); BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3563;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3563:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR05MB356323D651DB74378A99148AA5C60@DM5PR05MB3563.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(178726229863574)(10436049006162)(138986009662008)(150554046322364)(85827821059158)(95692535739014)(21748063052155);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(93006095)(93001095)(3231220)(944501229)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3563; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3563;
x-forefront-prvs: 05986C03E0
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: h5wlsLli+lLFp+TxBgovCUVsuQz5VxPJS5WmejZf9SuwGuKQnCB8ewE4ovzp2dQAeI2I2yNsp5ACXevo4XFFEIZwr5awvPipbLxEFKTjiz3HO/ROyK/3n/sPtXUkHqFKV2/M6yEtqIbacoQBNGiZegy7K0HpBcSaz4Q6OpCzFwA=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_053208F1483B474EBA3158AA56390805junipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: fefe1bbf-f5eb-4500-45b4-08d57f8e6a26
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Mar 2018 16:06:38.5499 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3563
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-03-01_08:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1803010200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/wNbtHx1gA9g7bv6yG6xSQksMHfk>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:07:05 -0000

Thanks Clyde.

Benoit, it's ready now.

Kent // shepherd

On 3/1/18, 10:29 AM, "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com<mailto:cwildes@cisco.com>> wrote:

Kent,

I published a new draft that fixes the last two points.

Thanks,

Clyde

From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Date: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 10:11 AM
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: Clyde Wildes <cwildes@cisco.com>om>, "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>om>, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>om>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>et>, NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>rg>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20

[+benoit]

Mahesh,

That's fine, if we want to put the RFC Editor note into the Introduction, I see that you did the same in the ACL draft.  But there still remains the use of IP addresses (not hostnames) in examples and, if we're fixing that, let's please also fix the typo in the title of Section 1.4.

Clyde, can you please post a v23 that fixes these last two points?

Thanks,
Kent  // shepherd


On 2/23/18, 1:05 PM, "Mahesh Jethanandani" <mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>> wrote:

Kent,




On Feb 23, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net<mailto:kwatsen@juniper.net>> wrote:

Hi Clyde,

Looking at your diff, I see that you aligned the Usage Example text and artwork by making the artwork use the IP address from the text, but you should've instead used the hostname in both locations.  Please see section 3.6 here: https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/checklist<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_standards_ids_checklist&d=DwMFAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=N9LJpCJBafHdUNdSOe63fe4yTYxK-wmVz_DgH1cnKjM&s=JrRJ2H8Pa9954dNFWzFQ0xW4hCYHxwnrMtFTBVZyvZI&e=>hCYHxwnrMtFTBVZyvZI&e=>.

Also, I see that you moved the Editorial Note to Section 1.4 (along with a typo in the title, ooops).  This is fine, I guess, though I was thinking instead about something like a top-level "RFC Editor Considerations" near the end [hmmm, a budding BCP? ;)].  Actually, I wish you had explained that the text was not in the Abstract, but in a "<note>" element, and it was just a rendering issue.  It's actually common to use the <note> element for this purpose (sorry for not recognizing it before). Please also either fix the typo or, better, move the section back to the <note> element.

I had recommended the move of the note from abstract section to the end of the Introduction section. Abstracts cannot have cross-references in them, which the note had. And that was one of the OPS-DIR comments too.





Kent // shepherd


===== original message =====

Kent, Tom, Yaron, and Ron,

A new version of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model has been published that addresses your concerns.

Thanks,



Clyde



On 2/20/18, 9:06 AM, "netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen" <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of kwatsen@juniper.net<mailto:kwatsen@juniper.net>> wrote:












Kent









You illustrate beautifully the problem I would like a solution to.









The current thinking AFAICT is that tree-diagrams




should be an Informative Reference.









Therefore, the RFC Editor will not hold publication until an RFC number




is assigned.









Therefore, a note asking the I-D reference to be updated to reflect the




assigned RFC number is null - the RFC can be published with the




reference as an i-d and not as an RFC which is what I expect the RFC




Editor to do.









QED





   Except I know that this draft will be stuck in MISREF state and tree-diagrams

   will in fact be assigned an RFC number by the time this draft is published.



   K.








Note that this is not the case of a Normative i-d reference being buried




in the YANG module and not being.noticed by the RFC Editor; that problem




I am content with.














Tom Petch

























Please also address these issues when posting -21 to address Benoit's

   issues.  Please post -21 ASAP as Benoit has already placed this draft on

   the IESG telechat in a couple weeks.









Thanks,




Kent // shepherd














On 2/14/18, 8:18 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise"

   <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org><mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of

   bclaise@cisco.com<mailto:bclaise@cisco.com><mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>> wrote:









Dear all,









- the draft is NMDA compliant, right? It should be mentioned.




Ex: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03, in the abstract and intro









  The YANG model in this document conforms to the Network Management









  Datastore Architecture defined in

   I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.














- As mentioned in the writeup, [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]

   should be an informative reference, not normative.









- Editorial:




OLD:




This draft addresses the common leafs




NEW:




This document addresses the common leafs









Please publish a new version asap.




In the mean time, I'm sending this draft to IETF LC.









Regards, Benoit




















   ------------------------------------------------------------------------

   --------








_______________________________________________




netmod mailing list




netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>




https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=cJ7MVnQVc1hgxpVF7oYiVn6Rbm-Qf2dDyrfYhL-s9io&s=u0Hn9GkO-B0jUGm1MnIQ4x4AgIZNXHBIaZhTPmt3dC8&e=












   _______________________________________________

   netmod mailing list

   netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>

   https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=vELsmeOQEHNm4fcyJJKG7EpwwzMBGc-MHvHhSPWRzro&s=jSGwP16XlM6ntMKUF3bkCAwRfRtRwATdly2BlUtx2RA&e=







_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=N9LJpCJBafHdUNdSOe63fe4yTYxK-wmVz_DgH1cnKjM&s=UjOEtJcF00aJzZs5hrqaIqWHebO11ugEeMcESrcmX30&e=>

Mahesh Jethanandani
mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>